/v/ - Video Games

Depends on the game

Games used to be challenging. Then games were only challenging in the post-game. Then they were only challenging if you tried to 100% them. Then they weren't challenging at all. And then there was warframe.

Yes

No

Depends

>>14742935

Some games are just too tedious to 100%. I tried 100%'ing the new doom, but the secrets are too hidden. While I am an autism myself, not so much that I was willing to slog through all the secrets in that game.

I think the first game I ever 100% was a series of unfortunate events for the GBA

all for some concept art of a toilet gun

Jesus, mods.

>>14742935

>Is getting the most bang for your buck actually fun\interesting or just a symptom of autism?

Gee, I dunno OP. Do you pay for games only to play parts of them?

I bet a company could put some form of "Collect all 100 of these things!" in a game but only include 45 of them and you wouldn't give a fuck. Or they could outright not put in the last half of the game since you're never gonna reach that either.

OP confirmed for game journalist.

>>14742998

It's already anchored, now just mock Kotaku for not liking extra longevity out of their games, preventing them from trying another "experience".

why anchor a hot, hot, HOT thread?

>Bumplocked

It's no worse than any other thread currently on /v/. It's because Mario and a soyboy were in the same image isn't it?

>>14742935

If it includes bullshit like spending 20 hours on collecting useless figurines, then yes.

>>14743003

>>14743008

Not saying Jesus to that. There are about two IDs who got their posts deleted and I'm sure they were banned too and the conversation was literally:

Anon 1: post shitty webm

Anon 2: go back to reddit

Anon 1: posts another shitty webm

In a thread that's bumplocked anyway. Mods are getting a bit trigger happy. I mean it's really been getting quite ridiculous lately.

I think the only game I had fun 100%ing was the original Spyro trilogy, because it felt like seeing everything the game had to offer rather than doing tedious grind shit they saved for post-game to add fake depth.

>>14743018

With cuckchanners coming in and posting garbage and faggots constantly yelling "BAN WHAT I DON'T LIKE" in their ears it makes a lot of sense to me

>>14743021

original Spyro is one game I wanna replay thanks for reminding me

>>14743018

The mods are finally stepping up against useless bloat posts prevalent in a lot of shit threads. Going in a shit thread just to call it shit is an equal waste amount of time for everyone involved, the mods are trying to get the idea across that you're better off not responding at all to shit or bait.

>>14743004

>>14743006

Because the soy meme with the Switch is just a badly disguised attempt at console wars and it's far more depressing than fun.

Not to mention the pic itself is clearly bait since it's only very slightly tangentially related to the topic at hand. Collecting all the Stars\Moons\Whatever has been a stable of Super Mario for a long while and many other similar games way past the completion of the story and it's itself the actual goal in the game anyway.

>>14743018

If it's a shitty webm that has nothing to do with the thread, yeah it should be deleted. Regardless of what thread it is, offtopic posting just dilutes the thread.

Let it be shitty by it's own merit instead of risking derailing it into something actually fun.

And anyone going "go back 2 reddit!" should be banned and follow their own advice. The last thing /v/ needs is more faggots repeating the same sentences over and over again like they do anything or aren't just spam at this point.

>>14743032

>And anyone going "go back 2 reddit!" should be banned and follow their own advice. The last thing /v/ needs is more faggots repeating the same sentences over and over again like they do anything or aren't just spam at this point.

Self-moderation like that is the only thing keeping /v/ even mildly usable right now, take that away and the board is fucked. We must subject all newfags to a hostile environment for shit opinions so they either leave or lurk.

>>14743021

Spyro actually gave you not only a better ending but also a pretty cool level to play when you finished everything else, plus it was fun to get every single dragon\gem in it.

Same thing for Crash Bandicoot series, where you can just finish the game, but there's an extra ending if you collect every gem, something that's actually a series of advanced chalenges instead of grinding.

There's also the whole "collect-a-ton" genre with Conker and Banjo&Kazooie, where the point of the game is to 100% it anyway, something that's actually fun since it involves exploring the whole game and learning every bit of gameplay you can use.

>>14743030

Responding to dumb shit with actually reasonable arguments should still be allowed so we never forget the actual reasons why something is dumb\shit\stupid instead of holding said opinion as dogma.

Replying with ">he fell for X meme" or "go back to reddit" however should be pruned off threads as they really add nothing except a downvote.

>>14743035

>Self-moderation like that is the only thing keeping /v/ even mildly usable right now, take that away and the board is fucked.

Yes that is exactly what we need. We have to give more free ways to shitposters to shit on every thread whether it's legitimate or not so that the board can have more quality threads.

>>14743023

>listening to faggots

>ever a good idea

>>14743030

>>14743032

But some people do need to be told to lurk more or go back to reddit. That has always beenan adequate reminder to newfags that they shouldn't be posting yet.

>>14743035

Exactly. What this faggot said.

Bottom line is this: we've been fine bullying the newfags for us. We never needed the mods defending our "safe space" for us. Funposting was rampant on this board back in 2014, 2015, 2016, then started to be gradually stamped out. This is video game discussion. It isn't something serious and it's supposed to be a fun place to visit and relax with anons, not tip toe on eggshells out of fear of being blocked out of the site for 3 or more hours over something stupid because the hotpockets take themselves way too seriously. Many legitimate anons have been either banned over something stupid, or swept up in a mass ban and banned for no reason whatsoever, myself included.

>>14743035

It's not self moderation though. You can repeat and spam "go back to X" as often as you want, the other guy never really has to do it and can keep posting as much as he wants.

It's really no different than a Downvote, people voicing they don't like that particular post, and just like a Downvote it makes it actually more visible since everyone else is curious to see what dumb shit got so many (You)'s

>take that away and the board is fucked

And take the posts that got those replies away instead and the board is saved instead.

>We must subject all newfags to a hostile environment

By this you actually mean "we must tell everyone how easily they can get our attention, what triggers us and what garners the most (you)'s around here"

Anyone without moderation powers should refrain from giving them attention and anyone with actual moderation powers should give them the attention they deserve.

>>14743018

No, they should be banning cuckchanners. The guy whose posts was delete was pure cancer.

>>14743050

Bullshit, shitposting was as despised when we got here just as it is right now you history revisionist fuck. Anyone who came here in the initial waves can remember how pissed everyone was when the guy posting HE threads kept ban evading, and some other faggots saying that this place needed shitposters or it would die due to lack of activity.

I agree that this place should be a place where we take it easy and shoot the shit, but there are limits to how much your posts can be shit before it starts annoying everyone else.

>>14743066

Plus we have a lot more cancer coming in than back than, since we're more popular now and cuckchan has been shitting the bed again.

>>14743047

When are you going to stop metafagging in every thread that gives you an opportunity to do so just because you got banned for posting gay furshit, furfag?

>>14743052

I say both things need to happen, both bullying and removal when necessary. The only problem with self-moderation is anons think they can shit on legitimate video game threads just because they don't like the game. Other than that, faggots need to be shown their posts were bad and they should feel bad, anyone who doubles down and says "nothing wrong with cuckchan :^)" should get removed.

>>14743047

>the mods are bad, therefore the users are better

I'd rather trust those we can held accountable for their actions instead of those that get a new ID on the next thread and shitpost for fun, mate.

>>14743044

Dontchuknow that /intl/ is the apex board here, what with so much self-moderation and the mods not doing any at all? Nothing but high quality threads there!

Or you can visit /tv/ for the same experience!

>>14743050

>But some people do need to be told to lurk more or go back to reddit.

I used to agree with that, but there's a flaw in that idea. It's weak against large groups of people, who will form a concensus against lurking because it's harder than just asking and they'll reinforce this idea with each other.

It's a flaw in the "lurk moar" mentality that leaves boards vulnerable to mass migration and kills small communities if they get too much attention.

Instead, some actual discussion should happen, someone taking the oportunity to actually educate the newcomers and pass along the local culture. If they refuse to learn it, no amount of "lurk moar" is gonna change that, but if they are willing to, passing that chance and letting them stay ignorant is on you.

Only by passing your culture to the newcomers can you make sure it continues. It's far more in our interest to spread it than in the newcomers to learn it, always remenber that.

>>14743044

The userbase knows better than the existing vols what is and isn't acceptable. The golden age of 8/v/ was the early years when any shit thread was dubsbombed but somewhere along the way the anons who were doing that lost their motivation or maybe just left entirely and now we have cuckchan threads all over the catalog. Or to go further back cuckchan's /tg/ was best when the userbase dealt with everything and started its slow decline when mods arrived and started enforcing their view of 'quality' posting.

>>14743052

>And take the posts that got those replies away instead and the board is saved instead.

It's quite clear vols will not do their jobs in this respect. You can bitch and moan about it in every meta thread and nothing will change. If they were reliably able to delete shit threads and police good ones I'd agree, currently they do the opposite.

>Anyone without moderation powers should refrain from giving them attention and anyone with actual moderation powers should give them the attention they deserve.

Again that's only practical if vols actually do their jobs properly. They never have, not anywhere in the history of (western) imageboards. By definition once you become a vol/mod you end up in a circle-jerk chatroom and become isolated from the userbase at large. A month or two of this and you have no connection to what the average anon wants.

>>14743070

>large groups of people, who will form a concensus against lurking because it's harder than just asking and they'll reinforce this idea with each other.

That's exactly what's happening to this board, and why it will be too late to save it when we hit critical mass.

>Anchored

What the hell

>>14743070

>Dontchuknow that /intl/ is the apex board here, what with so much self-moderation and the mods not doing any at all? Nothing but high quality threads there!

Nice strawman faggot, nobody is saying self-moderation only it's self-moderation and vols doing their role against the most blatant faggots.

>Or you can visit /tv/ for the same experience!

/tv/ was driven into the grounds by its BO actually.

>Instead, some actual discussion should happen, someone taking the oportunity to actually educate the newcomers and pass along the local culture.

I once thought like this but it's not practical. The first few times you see someone spout a cuckchan-tier opinion you argue back and explain it sure, it takes you fucktons of effort and 9/10 times they just spout another low-effort meme back at you so that effort is wasted. Slowly your motivation is killed and you give up and that makes sense: the amount of effort it takes to educate a retard is far higher than the amount of effort it takes to be the retard so there'll always be more faggots than you can educate. Unless you want to pay people to argue with retards as a full time job there just isn't enough time in the day to do this.

Also there are some who are just unfixable and they must be driven off with bullying, if not more retards show up and they end up feeling at home.

>>14743070

>someone taking the oportunity to actually educate the newcomers and pass along the local culture

>welcome refugees!!!!

In all seriousness, hell no. "Lurk more" is the hint that someone needs to keep lurking. If they refuse to lurk and keep posting, then that's when you report them because they are a troll. You see "lurk more" is a polite way of giving someone benefit of the doubt that they are just an ignorant newfag and not a troll. Your way of leaving it entirely up to the mods to pick out the newfags AND to ban those legit anaons who dare address the newfags is just not the way an anonymous board functions. Now you're just banning certain phrases without considering context and that is exactly the problem with the moderation as of now: jumping straight to the bannhammer without ever considering context.

>>14743072

The userbase contains everyone from people who've been in 4chan since the earliest days and moved here when the site came to being and people who started visiting only a month ago and are 12 years old. The moment you realize it's going to be post-2016 newfags talking shit at you because they think you're Reddit. We're leaving the site on the hands of the majority and who fucking knows who the majority on this site is right now, or what this majority could become in the near future?

>>14743072

Any time anyone admits being cuckchan they get banned, so what is this about not doing the jobs properly? What is properly to you?

>>14743069

>The only problem with self-moderation is anons think they can shit on legitimate video game threads just because they don't like the game.

That's because it's giving them some form of power without any responsibility. Nobody but mods is held to any standard at all, they do whatever they want and therefore shitposting just because they don't like the thread is just as legitimate for them as shitposting because the thread is shit.

This would be like having a local population where everyone is part of the militia and has a gun. Sure sounds a good way to ward off invasions, but when you have an internal quibble every week that ends up with at least 3 dead guys, you'll start wondering if it wasn't a better idea to have some kind of internal neutral group that handles those problems.

>>14743072

>The userbase knows better than the existing vols what is and isn't acceptable.

The vols come from the userbase very often. I have no idea why you expect people with absolutely no accountability to somehow perform better moderation or even having better standards. Would you like the Granblue thread posters to moderate /v/? Would you like those autists that shout "play Doom\Quake and nothing else!" to moderate /v/? Do you want Toddposters to moderate /v/?

>It's quite clear vols will not do their jobs in this respect.

The thread is bump locked for a reason and we have seen more active moderation lately. In fact, a lot of anons are complaining about excessive moderation so they are clearly doing something.

>If they were reliably able to delete shit threads and police good ones

I don't agree with deleting them. Bumplocking the threads and letting everyone else explain why it's stupid so OP learns sounds like a better idea, optinally banning him if it's clearly just shitposting by him.

>By definition once you become a vol/mod you end up in a circle-jerk chatroom and become isolated from the userbase at large.

That's a dumb reasoning, considering you can still post and read threads. You're not locked in that room unable to read the threads or even posting in them.

You're trying to equate this to being elected Senator, please don't take your imageboards that seriously. Or lightly, if you're american :^).

>>14743093

>they get banned

For like an hour maybe. They need to be permabanned.

>>14743070

So users can't hold OP's accountable for their shit threads but they can hold mods that can just silence whatever they don't like accountable because…? You sound like a retarded newfag who has no idea how imageboard culture works but are trying to impose your reddit-tier appeal to authority bullshit ideology on everyone else. Fuck off faggot.

>>14743091

>from people who've been in 4chan since the earliest days

There are very, very few of those around anywhere on imageboards. Hell most of them had left cuckchan years before the exodus. They really don't like the 'serious' posting attitude of more modern imageboard culture and would consider 8/v/ to take itself to seriously to be worth using.

>people who started visiting only a month ago and are 12 years old. The moment you realize it's going to be post-2016 newfags talking shit at you because they think you're Reddit. We're leaving the site on the hands of the majority and who fucking knows who the majority on this site is right now, or what this majority could become in the near future?

If the majority of the site is post-2016 newfags it's already lost, putting power in the hands of a minority of slightly-less-newfags who exist in a private circle-jerk to boot isn't going to solve that. We aren't that far gone yet though.

>>14743093

>Any time anyone admits being cuckchan they get banned,

Because most of the time they won't admit it.

>so what is this about not doing the jobs properly? What is properly to you?

Vols should ban the most blatant of newfags in addition to those who outright admit to it. After that the more low-level faggotry is not something I expect them to deal with (it's a lot of work and they aren't competent enough to do it) since the userbase at large can handle bullying newfags. We need a combined solution of moderation from vols and anons bullying newfags as self-moderation.

>>14743112

>it's a lot of work

That's no excuse if the users do the work for them by reporting. I always report cuckchan faggotry, but they hardly ever do anything about it.

>>14743079

If that's true, no amount of "lurk moar" will help. They will just "lurk" with each other and pass along the shitty culture they bring with them. The best you can do is pass along your culture and show why it's superior. If you refuse to do so, you have no reason to complain when they overtake yours.

>>14743086

You never give those explanations to the person you're replying to, though. Of course nobody is gonna say "welp, I was wrong, thanks for correcting me" online.

You just have to realize there's a lot of people actually lurking (ironically, the ones you told to lurk moar) and even if they don't post, they'll read your well written reply, learn something from it and start to loathe the faggot that replies with one line shitty memes.

You never put in effort for the shitposting faggots, you always do it for the ones that lurk.

>>14743089

>welcome refugees, bring on your culture!

is way different from

>welcome refugees, here's how we do things here, learn our customs or fuck off

is also different from

>welcome refugees, I hope you'll take your time to learn our customs because we sure as shit are not gonna try to teach you

You can't bar anyone from visiting a public website the same way you can bar someone from traveling to a country so you WILL take those "refugees" whether you want it or not. The best you can do now is cram down your culture down their throat with a healthy dose of "Here's 10 reasons why you're fucking shit uneducated cuckchan savages and here's 10 reasons this board is the fucking best".

If you can't do that and just tell them to behave while they learn your culture, don't act surprised when newfag ghettos pop up in every thread.

>>14743101

>The vols come from the userbase very often. I have no idea why you expect people with absolutely no accountability to somehow perform better moderation or even having better standards.

Because they instantly get access to the private circle-jerk(s) that the vols here use there are multiple and become detached from the opinions of the userbase at large. If you've ever seen what imageboard or forum moderators say about the average user in their private chats you'd understand, they quickly start to view themselves as superior in almost every way.

>Would you like the Granblue thread posters to moderate /v/? Would you like those autists that shout "play Doom\Quake and nothing else!" to moderate /v/? Do you want Toddposters to moderate /v/?

We currently have blatant Nintendrones and no I don't mean just Nintendo fans, that's just common sense, I mean faggots blind to other sides for moderators, it's the same difference. Vols always end up forming their own circle-jerk by hiring people like themselves. The difference of allow the entire userbase to self-moderate is that it isn't any one group that has a chance. The Doom/Quake oldfags, the Toddposters, the Granblue faggots and so on all have equal chance to bully others because the power to bully isn't restricted to one little circle-jerk.

>The thread is bump locked for a reason and we have seen more active moderation lately. In fact, a lot of anons are complaining about excessive moderation so they are clearly doing something.

And the quality of the board is still in the shitter. Doing something =/= doing something properly.

>I don't agree with deleting them. Bumplocking the threads and letting everyone else explain why it's stupid so OP learns sounds like a better idea, optinally banning him if it's clearly just shitposting by him.

That's fine as well. I agree openness is good.

>That's a dumb reasoning, considering you can still post and read threads. You're not locked in that room unable to read the threads or even posting in them.

You can but they rarely do. There's no need to because you're constantly able to speak to other vols who of course share your interests because that's how hiring for a mod team works.

>>14743104

There's no such thing as a permaban on 8chan, it's 90 days tops.

If you can 100% the game without having to look up what is needed to do it, and simply manage it out of sheer curiosity and excitement for and by yourself because the game is simply fun to play, then yes.

But most games are not, and require obscure shit and meta-gaming to achieve because achievement hunters are a pox upon the industry and another symptom spawned by Microsoft's hellish assault upon our hobby. As if paying for p2p online wasn't enough.

>>14743112

Thing is we're already putting a lot of power on to everyone on these site. Since we're all equal, everyone can "self-moderate" every thread that he personally thinks is cuckchan. In that sense self-moderation has completely lost it's original purpose and these days is just being used as an excuse to call people retarded, ruin threads and get off the hook 100% free.

>>14743105

>So users can't hold OP's accountable for their shit threads but they can hold mods that can just silence whatever they don't like accountable because…?

Because meta threads and board log plus screenshots can be used against the vols but if you go to another thread and post the ID of the previous OP, you're not proving anything.

The average poster here does not have the necessary tools or the necessary detachment to moderate anything, not even their own life. It's not that mods are good at their job but rather that average posters are actually WORSE at it and asking them to self moderate the board will reflect it.

>your reddit-tier appeal to authority

>reddit-tier

Upvotes and Downvotes are supposed to be self-moderation by the community, with the predictable result that people downvote unpopular shit and upvote dumb shit according to what the majority thinks, not what's actually good\bad. The only person suggesting "reddit-tier" moderation is you.

>>14743122

>That's no excuse if the users do the work for them by reporting. I always report cuckchan faggotry, but they hardly ever do anything about it.

A week or two ago a mod explained that the report queue is terrible and if there are too many reports they just bulk dismiss them and hope nothing important was in there.

>>14743131

>You never give those explanations to the person you're replying to, though. Of course nobody is gonna say "welp, I was wrong, thanks for correcting me" online.

You cannot expect anons to respond to every low-effort newfag with a detailed explanation of why they are wrong that's just impractical. I'm not going to spend ~10 minutes typing out a full response to every (1) and done newfag on this board because I have neither the time nor the desire to. Between having an actual job and wanting to play video games now and then I don't have hours to spend trying to 'fix' /v/. I can however tell them to fuck off back where they came from so they either leave or lurk.

>>14743104

>They need to be permabanned.

Permabans don't exist on this website. Now I do agree they need longer bans, but that's not up to me alone. I ocasionally dish out weeks long bans.

>>14743112

>Vols should ban the most blatant of newfags in addition to those who outright admit to it.

If you come up with a fairly good way to test if someone is a newfag let me know. I will say this, I tried to let myself be more zealous in removing cancer and people started complaining. Your side is not the only side here, not everybody likes too much moderation. Also, while you might feel confident you'd go unbanned in a board with more aggressive moderation, vols are also people with opinions that might differ from yours and you can easily end up banned.

>>14743152

>A week or two ago a mod explained that the report queue is terrible and if there are too many reports they just bulk dismiss them and hope nothing important was in there.

This is false, it's time people stopped parroting it. Anyone can make a board so there is no problem in sharing this: vols can easily dismiss bogus spammed reports, but doing that does not affect legitimate reports even if there are many of them.

>>14743146

>It's not that mods are good at their job but rather that average posters are actually WORSE at it and asking them to self moderate the board will reflect it.

You can keep saying this all you want. I consistently see people sage bombing terrible threads and have virtually never seen it done to a good thread. Perhaps there is one or two retards that occasionally call a thread shit but that's irrelevant. You're describing a problem that doesn't exist and using it to dismiss a problem that does exist.

>>14743152

>I can however tell them to fuck off back where they came from so they either leave or lurk.

And that's going to do fuck all. Even worse, it sets the precedent that if there's something you don't like you can call it names until it leaves. Then you have dumbasses calling each other shill and Reddit drowning out threads and when the mods ban them they think the mods banned them because they're discouraging self-moderation or this place is becoming a hugbox.

>>14743032

the pic is a well known "completionist"

the thread is about "100%ing" aka "completing"

MODs don't make sense and don't follow their own rules. This thread is clearly grabbing attention, but for some reason it has to die.

>>14743135

You sound like you have some grudge against the vols, especially with them having a channel to coordinate with each other, for whatever reason.

I'll have to take everything else you say with a grain of salt since you're clearly biased in that regard, but for the record, a moderation team that doesn't communicate with each other is bound to fail or contradict itself frequently. And since there's meta threads every now and then, they do care what the rest of the board thinks.

>We currently have blatant Nintendrones

So you have a prime example of what having a biased moderator can do to the board. Please do no suggest having even more by hoping that everyone else can also self-moderate the board because at that point it's the largest playerbase that decides the rules and I don't think we have the numbers to beat the Sonic fanbase.

>The difference of allow the entire userbase to self-moderate is that it isn't any one group that has a chance.

Yeah, it's just the biggest and the loudest, aka the group that should get the least moderation powers.

>The Doom/Quake oldfags, the Toddposters, the Granblue faggots and so on all have equal chance to bully others because the power to bully isn't restricted to one little circle-jerk.

You're advovating for Democracy here. I fear turning this thread politcally charged, but since it was doomed from the OP, fuck it.

Giving everyone a chance to have their voice heard sounds like a great idea until you realize you're giving everyone the same amount of power despite how terrible an idea that actually is.

If you were being operated on, you wouldn't want the scalpel to go through the hands of everyone in the building so everyone gets a chance at cutting you, you'd want it in the hands of the few that actually know how to use the scalpel. Same thing here, you want moderation in the hands of the few that not only have the tools to moderate but also have proven themselves sufficiently unbiased to do so.

>You can but they rarely do.

You have no way to prove this. Just saying, you assuming intentions here.

>>14743168

Have you read the rules, new friend?

https://8ch.net/v/rules.html

>>14743152

>I'm not going to spend ~10 minutes typing out a full response to every (1) and done newfag on this board because I have neither the time nor the desire to.

But you'll post a "go back to reddit" instead, despite that achieving far less for mostly the same effort?

Take this thread for instance. It's really not that hard to post "It's getting the most bang for your buck and actually getting to play the full game, OP" instead of "go back to reddit" and it's a sound argument for anyone else reading.

>>14743144

Vols are no more qualified than any other anon to decide what is and isn't a good thread. They are or at least should be just average anons who have been promoted more or less at random seriously you'll only weed out the real retards with any form of vol application to a higher level and then introduced into a special sub-culture which quickly corrupts them into acting/thinking like the existing vols.

If we assume that vols are just anons with some extra powers you have to ask what those powers are for: in an ideal world it's for removing the most blatant of faggots only along with obviously spam/illegal content and then making stickies. They don't also become the only gatekeepers of what is and isn't acceptable on /v/. They exist to clean up the board with the userbase not to mould the board to their whims.

>>14743156

>Permabans don't exist on this website. Now I do agree they need longer bans, but that's not up to me alone. I ocasionally dish out weeks long bans.

I'd like to see longer bans too actually. It's rare to see more than six hours. Unlike cuckchan 8chan won't tell you if you've had a ban that's expired so if you got banned for six hours and went to sleep it will expire before you come back again and won't know. Cuckchan always popped with a 'you were banned but it expired' if this happened. Assuming every anon posts roughly once a day when possible an average ban length of at least 24 hours would solve this.

>If you come up with a fairly good way to test if someone is a newfag let me know. I will say this, I tried to let myself be more zealous in removing cancer and people started complaining. Your side is not the only side here, not everybody likes too much moderation. Also, while you might feel confident you'd go unbanned in a board with more aggressive moderation, vols are also people with opinions that might differ from yours and you can easily end up banned.

That's another point about bullying though. I don't expect vols to handle the more questionable cases since bullying can resolve that, in many ways it adds a layer of protection where people can't bitch at vols for doing this essential work for board cleanliness.

The mods didn't delete the thread, so it's not against any rules. They must HATE 100%ing games, the only reason it got anchored

>>14743175

have u?

>>14743167

>saging a fucking bumplocked thread

>desperately pleading that people stop calling each other mean names

This is some peak cuckchan

>>14743169

>You sound like you have some grudge against the vols

And you sound like one of the newly hired mods that keeps fucking up and getting called out on it.

>You're advovating for Democracy here. I fear turning this thread politcally charged

Ahahahahaha holy fuck yeah you're the new shit vol

>>14743166

>You can keep saying this all you want. I consistently see people sage bombing terrible threads and have virtually never seen it done to a good thread. Perhaps there is one or two retards that occasionally call a thread shit but that's irrelevant. You're describing a problem that doesn't exist and using it to dismiss a problem that does exist.

You can keep saying this all you want. I consistently see people sage bombing good threads and have virtually never seen it done to a bad thread. Perhaps there is one or two retards that occasionally call a thread shit but that's irrelevant. You're describing a problem that doesn't exist and using it to dismiss a problem that does exist.

Please don't be that disengious, Anon. We are not discussing if their target for sage-bombing is good or bad, we are discussing if Anons should be allowed to do it at all.

Even shit threads shouldn't be sage-bombed, they should be ignored and left to rot in page 14 with 6 replies.

In fact, as long as a thread about a topic stays up, it wards off duplicates until it's off the catalog anyway, warranting for their deletion if the OP wants to have another go too soon.

>>14743188

Sage bombing lets retards know that their thread is shit and that their opinion is wrong. Shit-posters are going to shit-post no matter what, 90% of shit threads are not made by shit-posters. Once again you display a gross lack of understanding imageboard culture.

>>14743189

Bans are pointless on a forum that doesn't blanket perma-ban VPN's. Really every week there should be a board wide month long ban to weed out people legitimately too stupid to be able to change their IP.

>>14743167

>And that's going to do fuck all. Even worse, it sets the precedent that if there's something you don't like you can call it names until it leaves.

That's literally how we've always done it, even back through cuckchan's earlier history.

>Then you have dumbasses calling each other shill and Reddit drowning out threads and when the mods ban them they think the mods banned them because they're discouraging self-moderation or this place is becoming a hugbox.

I'd rather we went back to dubs as self-moderation personally rather than screaming shill and reddit, it would help us sort out the paranoid faggots from the actual anons.

>>14743169

>You sound like you have some grudge against the vols, especially with them having a channel to coordinate with each other, for whatever reason.

I have experienced flawed moderation for decades now, it's not really unique to /v/'s vols as much as it is to moderation of online communities in general. They will become detached from the average user and they will start to see themselves as superior. It's off-topic but as far back as the Greeks and Romans this was an issue which is why they had important roles rotate regularly and tried to guarantee the plebs (in this context that would be the non-vol anons) some direct representation. I'm not recommending we do anything like that because it'd be cancerous as shit in an anonymous community but nothing I'm saying here is new thinking.

>So you have a prime example of what having a biased moderator can do to the board. Please do no suggest having even more by hoping that everyone else can also self-moderate the board because at that point it's the largest playerbase that decides the rules and I don't think we have the numbers to beat the Sonic fanbase.

There really aren't that many Sonic fags on /v/.

>Yeah, it's just the biggest and the loudest, aka the group that should get the least moderation powers.

The group that should get the least moderation powers are those that want it, sadly they inherently make up the bulk of the vols.

>Giving everyone a chance to have their voice heard sounds like a great idea until you realize you're giving everyone the same amount of power despite how terrible an idea that actually is.

But that's the exact same problem with not allowing self-moderation at all. Everyone gets a chance to have a thread except the narrow few that vols have decided they dislike.

>Same thing here, you want moderation in the hands of the few that not only have the tools to moderate but also have proven themselves sufficiently unbiased to do so.

The existing vols are just as biased as any other group of randomly selected anons. I'm stating they should not be the only group that gets to attack things they don't like.

>>14743176

>But you'll post a "go back to reddit" instead, despite that achieving far less for mostly the same effort?

How does 'go back to reddit' take the same effort as a properly detailed post about the pros and cons of a game? I'll put the effort in where it's necessary but I'm not going to treat education newfags as a full time job I mean maybe if mark paid me in jew gold.

>It's really not that hard to post "It's getting the most bang for your buck and actually getting to play the full game, OP"

That's still a low effort post.

>>14743177

>corrupts them into acting/thinking like the existing vols

>mould the userbase to their whims

Explain

The thing is every person on this site tries to be a gatekeeper for what they consider to be bad content. Every. Person.' If what you said doesn't fit in to what a certain anon thinks is good content then he's free to shit on your thread. And don't pretend like the good anons drown out the bad anons with their own self-moderation because that's not true.

>>14743194

>That's literally how we've always done it, even back through cuckchan's earlier history.

AND LOOK WHERE IT'S TAKEN US EVERY FUCKING TIME

The board keeps getting worse and worse every fucking month and there's absolutely no sign of it getting any better.

>>14743168

>the pic is a well known "completionist"

You mean an e-celeb. You're also not fooling anyone, everyone can see why you posted the "ebin hipster with agape mouth and Switch game in background"

>the thread is about "100%ing" aka "completing"

It's about "Should I play ALL of a videogame or not?" and it's a stupid question.

It's bad bait, a stupid thread mocking completionists at best and the only reason it's getting attention is because it derailed into meta discussion about the board. That's how bad your thread is, it had to derail into something this controversial to stay alive.

>>14743181

>And you sound like one of the newly hired mods that keeps fucking up and getting called out on it.

If I was, I'd have deleted all your posts, wouldn't I? :^)

I just like some stability in moderation and self-moderation in boards is code-word for anarchy since when it starts, any vol trying to do their job is seen as interference with it.

>Ahahahahaha holy fuck yeah you're the new shit vol

That really wasn't an argument, but whatever. I really don't like discussing politics outside of political boards, that's why I said that, but the point still stands. Giving the same power to people that have different capabilities to use it and actually have no responsabilities at all to begin with makes no sense.

It's like giving women the right to vote without having them sign up for the draft.

>>14743191

>Sage bombing lets retards know that their thread is shit and that their opinion is wrong

No, it lets them know that there's an autist online that doesn't like their thread topic enough to actually spam their thread, it doesn't actually prove anything.

>Once again you display a gross lack of understanding imageboard culture.

Says the guy arguing that giving a thread more attention that it deserves is a good thing. Back in my days "don't feed the trolls" was a very important rule, but now it seems "feed the trolls till they get full" is the goto idea.

>>14743194

>I have experienced flawed moderation for decades now

So have I. But I compare it to the times I've seen self-moderation instead of judging it alone. The point isn't picking what's good but what's better, since nothing will ever be 100% good.

Self-moderation brings more problems than it solves.

>The group that should get the least moderation powers are those that want it

This would be the group that demands self-moderation, actually. That's literally what they are asking for, the ability to moderate the board to their likings.

>Everyone gets a chance to have a thread except the narrow few that vols have decided they dislike.

Except you can go to meta threads with screenshots of the thread and board log and demand satisfaction.

If some autist starts to "self-moderate" a thread you were posting in because he doesn't like it, are you gonna ask someone else to come in and self-moderate his self-moderation? Or are you gonna ask a vol to step in and ban the fag, deleting all his spam?

If you're still gonna depend on vols at the end, might as well let them be the ones that handle thread\post deletion and posters in charge of what threads get replies instead.

>The existing vols are just as biased as any other group of randomly selected anons. I'm stating they should not be the only group that gets to attack things they don't like.

But they can be called on it and held responsible, whereas any other anons get a new ID every thread.

Meanwhile, the natural conclusion of what you're asking for is what happens in Rimworld and Dwarf Fortress threads, where someone from one playerbase shitposts in the other thread because he doesn't like the game and the natural self-moderation response is to shitpost in the other thread, ensuring both threads are shit, instead of each playerbase sticking to it's thread and shitposters in either having their posts deleted.

>That's still a low effort post.

It gets the point across, it's the required effort anyway. And it's not really "effort" if you actually like talking about videogames anyway. Lots of people enjoy going on autistic paragraphs about a particular topic anyway, either because they like it that much or just want to practice their english or speed-typing.

If posting on /v/ sounds like a chore to you, maybe you need a job?

>>14743203

>corrupts them into acting/thinking like the existing vols

By definition existing moderation teams hire people like themselves. Then these people, already similar to those already there, are exposed to a narrow circle-jerk used to communicate between the mods. These regularly go off-topic from mere moderation to the general subject of interest and just ends up in a consensus. Private moderation chats are a necessary evil but they also inherently breed cancer.

>mould the userbase to their whims

Ban things I don't like, same as any anon would do given power. What I'm getting at is that vols are not better than anons, they're just anons more-or-less randomly selected to gain additional powers. It's not like becoming a vol magically changes who they are. We should not reserve the right to decide what is and isn't a good thread/opinion to vols because they aren't anything fucking special.

>The thing is every person on this site tries to be a gatekeeper for what they consider to be bad content. Every. Person.' If what you said doesn't fit in to what a certain anon thinks is good content then he's free to shit on your thread.

Agreed, which includes the vols themselves. Bullying/self-moderation means everyone can do that, banning bullying means the power to gatekeep lies in the hands of a tiny group who are no more qualified than anyone else to decide. Actually the only group that won't instantly shit on things are the newfags who are used to being relatively polite due to non-anonymous situations.

>AND LOOK WHERE IT'S TAKEN US EVERY FUCKING TIME

Actually it's normally poor moderation that causes problems. Again anyone who was around during old-/tg/ on cuckchan will know the rise of nazimod is what fucked it more than anything else for example.

>The board keeps getting worse and worse every fucking month and there's absolutely no sign of it getting any better.

Because self-moderation has decreased and vols have begun 'protecting' certain shit threads. Now I think their intentions in protecting them are probably pure but it's still not right. We must return to the way things were done in the early honeymoon period after the first exodus.

>>14743135

>Because they instantly get access to the private circle-jerk(s) that the vols here use there are multiple and become detached from the opinions of the userbase at large. If you've ever seen what imageboard or forum moderators say about the average user in their private chats you'd understand, they quickly start to view themselves as superior in almost every way.

I won't say circlejerks don't cause the people involved to become detached because I don't have experience with that. There is no circlejerking among /v/ volunteers, I won't provide proof so you'll just have to take my word for it. Now I will say that what causes a faster detachment from the rest of the userbase is becoming a volunteer, someone with power to delete other anon's posts, to ban other anons and most importantly, see the post history of anons. The change of perspective is real and you start thinking differently about the problems and how they should be tackled, and you realize it's not as simple as "remove cuckchan".

>>14743194

>I'd rather we went back to dubs as self-moderation personally rather than screaming shill and reddit, it would help us sort out the paranoid faggots from the actual anons.

It's all the same, people derailing threads they don't like and everyone has a different opinion on what is good or not, or what should be acceptable here or not. There is a lot of shit we all agree should not be tolerated on /v/, so it's not really a problem if those things get bullied, but they are also easily removed by volunteers. It's when anons start derailing threads about video games they don't like that it becomes a problem.

>>14743215

Right bud, go ahead and see what you get by trying to ban people from telling people when their shit stinks. I've had enough of your autism for one day.

>>14743229

The lot of you can't ban other anons.

>>14743215

>So have I. But I compare it to the times I've seen self-moderation instead of judging it alone. The point isn't picking what's good but what's better, since nothing will ever be 100% good.

I'm not saying self-moderation or vols I'm saying and. They must work together.

>This would be the group that demands self-moderation, actually. That's literally what they are asking for, the ability to moderate the board to their likings.

Why do you think vols become vols? The goodness of their heart? Even if they did apply with good intentions moderation is hard work, those that stick around have a desire for power on some level because otherwise they wouldn't continue doing it for free.

>Except you can go to meta threads with screenshots of the thread and board log and demand satisfaction.

Nothing ever happens in meta threads. Nothing. At best mark will say his finger slipped and it was a mistake then go right back to doing the same thing hours later.

>If some autist starts to "self-moderate" a thread you were posting in because he doesn't like it, are you gonna ask someone else to come in and self-moderate his self-moderation? Or are you gonna ask a vol to step in and ban the fag, deleting all his spam?

I'll call him a fucking faggot right back because that's how imageboards work. Self-modertion is not the same as one autist spamming a thread.

>If you're still gonna depend on vols at the end, might as well let them be the ones that handle thread\post deletion and posters in charge of what threads get replies instead.

No they are a last line of defence not the first. Think of them as the police, you want them around to handle the serial killers and the gangs but you don't want them to come shoot someone for having the wrong opinion about Quake.

>But they can be called on it and held responsible, whereas any other anons get a new ID every thread.

Calling out a vol achieves nothing, people have been doing it for years. Hell if it worked we wouldn't be on fucking 8chan.

>instead of each playerbase sticking to it's thread and shitposters in either having their posts deleted.

That's just a hugbox. Might as well just turn into cuckchan's /vg/.

>And it's not really "effort" if you actually like talking about videogames anyway. Lots of people enjoy going on autistic paragraphs about a particular topic anyway, either because they like it that much or just want to practice their english or speed-typing.

>If posting on /v/ sounds like a chore to you, maybe you need a job?

I have a job, that's why I don't spend all damn day laying out to newfags why their opinions are wrong.

>>14743241

No shit, Sherlock.

>>14743217

>What I'm getting at is that vols are not better than anons, they're just anons more-or-less randomly selected to gain additional powers.

>they aren't anything fucking special.

Way to contradict yourself. They are something special otherwise they wouldn't have the ability to ban you. I dislike having to rely on them but I certainly trust them more than the average poster.

>banning bullying means the power to gatekeep lies in the hands of a tiny group who are no more qualified than anyone else to decide

And if you allow it you the power to gatekeep lies on everyone. Which is just as bad if not worse.

>Actually it's normally poor moderation that causes problems

But we're on the case for /v/, not the "general" case. In this case it's always someone making a thread. If the thread is shit, then the vols delete it or bumplock it, maybe banning the anon. If the thread is not shit then it still needs the approval of every person on the site before there can be actual discussion or else there has to be someone shittalking the vols for not deleting the thread and trying to piss off the OP and then have his posts deleted before it can be derailed, and then there can be actual discussion. Mods are involved in board and chan shattering events, for the slow degradation of posting quality into near cuckchan levels the blame is on shitposters.

Also in the early honeymoon period shit worked because there wasn't anyone using self moderation as an excuse to shit on stuff they disliked. If we try that shit again /v/ is going to go down the shitter even faster.

>>14743220

>I won't say circlejerks don't cause the people involved to become detached because I don't have experience with that. There is no circlejerking among /v/ volunteers, I won't provide proof so you'll just have to take my word for it

Good to hear that /v/'s vols have managed to solve a problem that has eluded solution by the greatest political thinkers for all of human history. You won't see from the inside but it always becomes a circle-jerk. I've been on both sides and you don't realise until you leave how closely aligned everyone's thinking becomes.

>Now I will say that what causes a faster detachment from the rest of the userbase is becoming a volunteer, someone with power to delete other anon's posts, to ban other anons and most importantly, see the post history of anons. The change of perspective is real and you start thinking differently about the problems and how they should be tackled, and you realize it's not as simple as "remove cuckchan".

Well there I'm in some degree of agreement: again I don't expect vols to have to remove the more subtle newfag infiltration because it's hard for them to do so. Self-moderation allows that to be dealt with without vols getting involved.

>It's all the same, people derailing threads they don't like and everyone has a different opinion on what is good or not, or what should be acceptable here or not.

We should go back to dubs as self-moderation because we have specific rules about how many times you can dubspost or re-roll. That way it's at least semi-regulated without being entirely in the control of vols.

>>14743244

I don't know how to convey it to you if you still don't get it. Inside this board volunteers have nearly ultimate power and this is one of the top boards on the site. Do you want volunteers that use their powers freely when it comes to banning people they don't like or volunteers that restrain themselves and realize their actions have real consequences to the board? Do you want 10 marks?

>>14743254

10 Marks would be an ineffectual as one Mark, since he doesn't do anything anyway. I just want the wave of rapefugees to be dealt with.

The fact that there have been like 4 meta threads in the past 2 days should be a huge warning that the board is close to death. Do something.

>>14743249

>Way to contradict yourself. They are something special otherwise they wouldn't have the ability to ban you.

The power to ban people doesn't make them special. Think of them as a jury rather than as a judge. Juries are made up of your peers, judges are not.

>I dislike having to rely on them but I certainly trust them more than the average poster.

Why? They are only the average poster that happened one day to fall into the powers of moderation.

>And if you allow it you the power to gatekeep lies on everyone. Which is just as bad if not worse.

If everyone can gatekeep it's next to impossible for a handful of fags to control discussion. Think of it as /v/'s 2nd Amendment: the right of the people to be a cunt to people you don't like.

>In this case it's always someone making a thread.

What about newfags inside a good thread?

>Mods are involved in board and chan shattering events

>chan

Thanks for outing yourself newfag.

>>14743229

He probably means that, as moderators, they get to see a full picture of someone's posting history.

So you'll see someone posting some dumb shit and the first instinct is to delete\ban. But then you see he actually made a different post in another thread that's actually good, so what the fuck are you gonna do now?

Or you ban someone that's just being a stupid faggot, but then he comes back with another IP and starts shitposting even harder, ban evading as fast as you can, making you wonder that maybe it as a good idea not to touch the poop, that maybe he'd have stuck to that one thread instead.

Or maybe sometimes you try to follow a rule for everything, like deleting porn dumps, but then for that one thread that you do so, everyone else starts complaining about it because in that particular context it was acceptable, but you had no idea about it because you weren't lurking the thread for the start and you probably have no interest in that thread.

Or maybe you'll see someone spamming a thread and you'll delete his shit because it's just spam, and then he starts complaining about mods being shills for whatever topic is on that thread because that user in particular thinks he was doing everyone with a favor with his self-moderation, and before you know it there's 5 different Anons (not IDs since you can see their post history) that agree with him in that mods are biased towards that topic when all you did was delete what seemed like spam.

Or maybe after the previous issue, you'll ignore a thread that's being sage-bombed by someone that dislikes the game being discussed, and every anon in it that just wanted to talk about the game complains that mods never do their job or that they are biased and don't like the game as well, when you probably don't even know what the topic there is.

It's a lot easier for Anons to paint their "oponent" in a very black and white term. That particular ID is clearly Reddit because he said X, Y and Z, therefore he should be banned. But a moderator will likely see far more than that and has to take that information into account when dealing with him, so he sees far more than the black and white representation everyone else sees.

This also goes the other way. If a moderator takes a particular decision based on all that information that's not available to regular anons, everyone else will still judge the decision based on their black & white view of the problem and thus think it's fair\unfair according to what they think the original problem was.

>>14743243

>They must work together.

They can't. Everytime a mod intervenes during self-moderation it's seen as interfering with it and bad. There's no concept of jurisdiction here, so you either implement it into the culture (self moderate as much as you like but vols get the last word) or you're stuck with implementing either system, not both.

So instead of hoping self-moderating anons understand that vols override their moderation, it's probably for the best to go with the one system that gives less problems.

>Why do you think vols become vols? The goodness of their heart?

Again, I'll remenber that your own bias plays against your argumentation. You're not saying why they are chosen either for that position, just acerting that they are chosen for bad reasons.

>Nothing ever happens in meta threads. Nothing. At best mark will say his finger slipped and it was a mistake then go right back to doing the same thing hours later.

Rule 8 was created because of discussion in Meta threads. The soft-ban on political topics on /v/ as well. You're exagerating in that "nothing happens" just becaue whatever pet peeve you have hasn't been adressed yet.

And again, this is about the merits of self-moderation. A meta thread for self-moderation would accomplish far less, if it wasn't sage-bombed to begin with.

>Self-modertion is not the same as one autist spamming a thread.

Tell that to the autists spamming threads. Also "that's not real self-moderation!"

>you don't want them to come shoot someone for having the wrong opinion about Quake.

And I also don't want a militia to pop in FPS threads telling everyone that whatever game they are playing is shit and they should be playing Quake instead. But unfortunnaly, that's self-moderation for them.

>Calling out a vol achieves nothing

Calling out an Anon or an ID achieves less.

>That's just a hugbox

Posting in the threads about topics you like and avoiding the threads about games you don't like is a hugbox?

Are you sure you're not mixing the concept of "posting in thread X about how you hate game Y while everyone else in thread Y is posting about how they hate game X and everyone in those threads agrees with each other"?

By your definition music festivals are hugboxes since it's a lot of people listening to the music they like live.

>I have a job, that's why I don't spend all damn day laying out to newfags why their opinions are wrong.

But you'll tell them to go back to reddit because their opinion is wrong.

You'll tell them it's wrong, just not why, and they are supposed to spend time learning it because you have a job and they don't.

Talk about lazy self-centered fags, might as well not posting anything if you have nothing of value to add, Anon.

>>14743276

>So you'll see someone posting some dumb shit and the first instinct is to delete\ban. But then you see he actually made a different post in another thread that's actually good, so what the fuck are you gonna do now?

A stopped clock is right twice a day. No tolerance for cuckchanners.

>>14743260

<The power to remove certain posters from a chan doesn't make them special

I'm sorry you were born retarded.

>If everyone can gatekeep it's next to impossible for a handful of fags to control discussion.

Yes and instead everyone and their mother has the power to control it.

>What about newfags inside a good thread?

What about them? Should we use our psychic powers to detect the otherwise undetectable newfags to bully them into nothing because like you've said self-moderation always end up as just an uneffective insult?

>Thanks for outing yourself out newfag

Ouch, my feelings

>>14743251

>we have specific rules about how many times you can dubspost or re-roll

Invalid the second VPNs are a thinkg and "you" becomes your number of IPs.

There's positive aspects of using VPNs, but there's also negatives, just like TORposting, just like with everything else. If those are to be allowed and considered, then you must also consider the effects they have and mold the rules to take it into account.

As the rules currently stand and if you were to follow them strictly, someone that can have a sufficiently large amount of IPs is actually allowed to fill a thread with a porn dump and not break any rules, as long as he switches IP every few images,

Or post a "rollan image" and keep switching IP for everytime he "rolls". Or change IP for every 3 "checkem" post or so.

>>14742986

Try 100% the original Wolfenstein 3D without any cheats, walkthroughs, guides, maps etc.

>>14743283

><The power to remove certain posters from a chan doesn't make them special

Please point out where I called an imageboard a 'chan', this is a mistake only newfags such as yourself would make because it requires a fundamental misunderstanding of how imageboards came about.

>Yes and instead everyone and their mother has the power to control it.

Yes, the entire userbase. If you can't trust the entire userbase you might as well abandon ship entirely.

>What about them? Should we use our psychic powers to detect the otherwise undetectable newfags to bully them into nothing because like you've said self-moderation always end up as just an uneffective insult?

It's pretty obvious who it is.

>>14743251

>You won't see from the inside but it always becomes a circle-jerk. I've been on both sides and you don't realise until you leave how closely aligned everyone's thinking becomes.

There has to be a consensus on how to moderate the board, else there is no moderation, just vols doing whatever they feel like.

>>14743260

>the power to remove people from a community based on what they say doesn't make them special

Every anon can say "go back to reddit" but only a small amount of them can actually force you to leave.

>They are only the average poster that happened one day to fall into the powers of moderation.

That's how it works in your head, that's not how it actually works. Next time there's an opening for moderation, send an application yourself and find out how it works instead.

>If everyone can gatekeep it's next to impossible for a handful of fags to control discussion.

If everyone can gatekeep it's next to impossible for a handful of posters to have a discussion.

>Think of it as /v/'s 2nd Amendment: the right of the people to be a cunt to people you don't like.

Last I checked, the 2nd Amendment doesn't allow you to go inside a bar and toss feces everywhere in an attempt to force everyone to leave just because you don't like the beer being served inside.

You can go in, say you don't like the beer and go out, or better yet, visit a bad that serves the beer you like instead.

>>14743259

>>14743259

>The fact that there have been like 4 meta threads in the past 2 days should be a huge warning that the board is close to death. Do something.

>>>/sudo/

>>14743293

>Please point out where I called an imageboard a 'chan'

You didn't, I'm just pissing you off by using a word you dislike. What are you going to do, self-moderate me out of your chan, faggot?

>If you can't trust the entire userbase you might as well abandon ship entirely.

As of right now I have absolutely no reason to trust the userbase here, considering the turn this site is taking since ~3 years. I make quality posts and I edit shit in GIMP or make webms every once in a while, that's how I try to contribute to /v/ instead of just insulting people I don't like.

>It's pretty obvious who it is.

Exactly. If they're so cut and dry cases you can report the fucker. I'm not calling for the removal of self-moderation, I'm saying that self-moderation is becoming more of a problem than an asset.

>>14743277

>They can't. Everytime a mod intervenes during self-moderation it's seen as interfering with it and bad. There's no concept of jurisdiction here, so you either implement it into the culture (self moderate as much as you like but vols get the last word) or you're stuck with implementing either system, not both.

The integrated system was more or less what we used to have.

>So instead of hoping self-moderating anons understand that vols override their moderation, it's probably for the best to go with the one system that gives less problems.

If we're handing all power to the vols we fly in the face of the very fucking reason we left cuckchan in the first place.

>Again, I'll remenber that your own bias plays against your argumentation.

I have been a moderator on other imageboards and outside of imageboards, I'm telling you this is how it works because I've seen it first-hand repeatedly.

>You're not saying why they are chosen either for that position, just acerting that they are chosen for bad reasons.

You are misunderstanding. I'm not saying they're chosen for bad reasons I'm saying that the application process fails to do anything but weed out the actual retards and the most obvious malicious applicants. This is why it's basically random who ends up as a vol. In an ideal world we'd use something like post history I guess but that's obviously not possible in a world of VPNs and anonymity.

>Rule 8 was created because of discussion in Meta threads. The soft-ban on political topics on /v/ as well. You're exagerating in that "nothing happens" just becaue whatever pet peeve you have hasn't been adressed yet.

A grand total of fuck all in four years yes. And I'm not going to go into the issues with Rule 8 because that's another topic but it's hardly a well-formed rule.

>And I also don't want a militia to pop in FPS threads telling everyone that whatever game they are playing is shit and they should be playing Quake instead. But unfortunnaly, that's self-moderation for them.

That's how it goes, otherwise we end up with hugboxes. And as per your own argument you should educate them on why that opinion is wrong, that was your point was it not?

>Calling out an Anon or an ID achieves less.

No it achieves the same: nothing.

>Posting in the threads about topics you like and avoiding the threads about games you don't like is a hugbox?

No deleting posts that shit on games someone doesn't like is hugboxing. Everyone sticking only to subjects they like is hugboxing.

>By your definition music festivals are hugboxes since it's a lot of people listening to the music they like live.

Not going to disagree with that, they are also hives of political hugboxing (see: Sweden's female-only ones).

>But you'll tell them to go back to reddit because their opinion is wrong.

Because it takes much less of my time yes.

>You'll tell them it's wrong, just not why, and they are supposed to spend time learning it because you have a job and they don't.

Because it's not my job to educate newfags.

>Talk about lazy self-centered fags, might as well not posting anything if you have nothing of value to add, Anon.

I post with detail where a post or thread deserves it. Newfags don't.

>>14743293

>If you can't trust the entire userbase you might as well abandon ship entirely.

If you can't trust the entire population of a city, you should move out. And having police or your own guns is admitting you don't trust them.

>It's pretty obvious who it is.

Oh right, it's mister "I know everything about everyone else because I'm never wrong".

>>14743303

Sudo is not for board meta discussion faggot. It's completely unusable for its intended purpose (technical issues and suggestions) because people use it as a de-facto meta board.

>>14743299

As I said it's a necessary evil but an evil nonetheless.

>>14743302

>Every anon can say "go back to reddit" but only a small amount of them can actually force you to leave.

That just makes them powerful faggots, not special faggots.

>That's how it works in your head, that's not how it actually works. Next time there's an opening for moderation, send an application yourself and find out how it works instead.

It's still essentially random. Unless you want to go as far as inspecting real-life IDs there is no effective system available.

>If everyone can gatekeep it's next to impossible for a handful of posters to have a discussion.

It worked fine for over a decade back on cuckchan, it worked fine here for at least two years.

>Last I checked, the 2nd Amendment doesn't allow you to go inside a bar and toss feces everywhere in an attempt to force everyone to leave just because you don't like the beer being served inside.

A bar is a private establishment, you're welcome to stand outside it and protest about the shitty beer all you want.

>You can go in, say you don't like the beer and go out, or better yet, visit a bad that serves the beer you like instead.

I'm heavily reminded of that faggy old webcomic about 'the community showing you the door'.

>>14743312

>As of right now I have absolutely no reason to trust the userbase here, considering the turn this site is taking since ~3 years. I make quality posts and I edit shit in GIMP or make webms every once in a while, that's how I try to contribute to /v/ instead of just insulting people I don't like.

Again I'm not willing to accept that the bulk of the userbase is worthless. If it is there's nothing worth saving.

>Exactly. If they're so cut and dry cases you can report the fucker. I'm not calling for the removal of self-moderation, I'm saying that self-moderation is becoming more of a problem than an asset.

Reporting isn't infallible.

>>14743321

Anon, how would you hire more volunteers? If it isn't any random anon that proves to not be a cancerous faggot, how would you plan to get a new volunteer?

>In an ideal world we'd use something like post history I guess but that's obviously not possible in a world of VPNs and anonymity.

This proves nothing, regardless of VPNs or Tor. It's would only serve to "weed out the actual retards and the most obvious malicious applicants".

>No deleting posts that shit on games someone doesn't like is hugboxing. Everyone sticking only to subjects they like is hugboxing.

Anon, if everyone thought the way you did, you would not have a place to discuss video games, you would have cuckchan /v/.

>>14743345

>If you can't trust the entire population of a city

A city is hundreds of thousands or millions of people. Nobody who isn't a complete naive retard can trust that there won't be bad apples among so many.

>>14743368

Explain in detail. It seems to me you haven't looked at cuckchan lately.

>>14743360

>Anon, how would you hire more volunteers? If it isn't any random anon that proves to not be a cancerous faggot, how would you plan to get a new volunteer?

There isn't a better system, I'm not arguing we remove vols just that we acknowledge their limitations.

>This proves nothing, regardless of VPNs or Tor. It's would only serve to "weed out the actual retards and the most obvious malicious applicants".

Which is always the bastard. Again understand that I'm not saying we remove vol I'm saying that anons must be free to make up for their shortcomings.

>Anon, if everyone thought the way you did, you would not have a place to discuss video games, you would have cuckchan /v/.

Quality is not the only reason I left cuck/v/. The mods becoming the end all and be all of what was allowed on the board and the users not cracking down on newfags were just as much of a problem, in fact it was the central issue.

>>14743345

>If you can't trust the entire population of a city, you should move out.

Yes, that's true. Cities are cancer and the countryside is much safer. At the very least move out and raise your kids there.

>And having police or your own guns is admitting you don't trust them.

I'm arguing for armed police and armed civilians, not armed police and compliant civilians.

>>14743406

Of course I haven't gone to cuckchan, but I've seen the kind of cancer that has been leaking here starting with that soyjak shit.

>>14743414

I don't think the other person was saying volunteers are always qualified to moderate, just that it is preferable to leave it in the hands of a few people who know how things work rather than leave it to mob rule.

>in fact it was the central issue.

I think the central issue was that it became too popular, it quickly got swamped by retards and was always targeted by people who wanted to fuck with it for fun. Communities are hard to keep healthy, but a big influx of outsiders always kills a community. I am afraid it will happen here, but the only way to combat that problem is a double edged sword and I don't think it's worth grabbing onto it just yet.

>>14743442

>just that it is preferable to leave it in the hands of a few people who know how things work rather than leave it to mob rule.

Which is what we'll keep coming back to: I don't think they're any more qualified to do this shit.

>I think the central issue was that it became too popular, it quickly got swamped by retards and was always targeted by people who wanted to fuck with it for fun.

That happened way back in 2010 with chanology, it was the moderation/moot finally selling us out that killed it.

>I am afraid it will happen here, but the only way to combat that problem is a double edged sword and I don't think it's worth grabbing onto it just yet.

We needed to do this months ago.

Gotta go out for a bit, interesting thread though. Didn't expect any actual discussion of substance on /v/'s issues.

>>14743418

>Of course I haven't gone to cuckchan, but I've seen the kind of cancer that has been leaking here starting with that soyjak shit.

I always make a point of deleting and checking the post history to see if it's worth a ban. Unfortunately there was a commotion when mark did nothing wrong by deleting the suspect sudden soyjack posting and now he's afraid to curb it permanently.

>>14743458

Well, moot becoming an SJW faggot killed the entire site as far as I am concerned, it's just that if the mods there hated what /v/ became I understand becoming discouraged to do anything to fix it and just going with the flow, especially if they aren't being replaced.

>>14743465

I know, Mark doesn't understand that they are trying to subvert the board. Try and talk to him.

>>14743484

Metafaggotry is also used as an attempt to subvert the board, which is why I told you to go to /sudo/ earlier, for claiming meta threads mean the board is dying. A lot of the times it's (((someone))) complaining about vols doing their job.

>>14743504

Meta threads can be made by anyone, and are often made by people who either have no right to complain or are trying to shape the general opinion of how the board should be moderated to a worse state claiming mark is defending nintendo and making /v/ a nintendo hugbox by removing the soyjack shit.

>>14743513

I know that cuckchanners complained about the moderation to try and subvert the board. But that doesn't mean there aren't people with legit complaints. And just because OP is a fag doesn't mean everyone in the thread is.

>>14743504

>>14743513

Also a constant metafag who posted in this thread and will always post in threads where meta comes up is a furfag who will always shit on /v/ moderation because he got banned for posting furshit. Metafags are not all interested in the health of the board, they are just upset they can't do as they please here.

>>14743519

I look at every meta discussion I find to see if anyone has valid complaints. Even here I understand everyone's concerns, it's just that nobody has a real solution on how to effectively moderate the board so that everyone is happy and the board is a good place for discussing video games. Honestly I think we need more volunteers to begin with.

>>14742969

>And then there was warframe.

What did he mean by this?